RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00348
INDEX CODE: 128.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be reimbursed (in the amount of $3965.22) for expenses she
incurred as a result of the partial mobilization orders that were
cancelled on 16 November 2001.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by
the appropriate office of the Air Force.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ USAF/XOI-RE states that applicant was not authorized to enter into
any contractual relationship or undertake any actions requiring
obligation of military funds until she was actually mobilized – which
did not occur. They state it is regrettable that applicant’s
anticipated mobilization was cancelled shortly in advance of the
projected activation date. Nonetheless, because she was never
activated, the Air Force does not have an obligation to reimburse her
for the costs she incurred. Therefore, they recommend denial of
applicant’s request. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 August 2002, a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As
of this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Staff
and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application on 24
September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jan 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AF/XOI-RE, dated 29 Jul 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Aug 02.
PEGGY E. GORDON
Panel Chair
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01788 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her retirement year ending (RYE) 27 July 2001, be changed from an unsatisfactory year to a satisfactory year. She reported for active duty on 4 July 2001, served her annual tour, stayed to fulfill the year’s IDT’s, and returned to...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00578 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her entry-level separation be upgraded to an honorable discharge and her reenlistment (RE) code changed to allow her the opportunity to reenter the Air Force. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
On 16 November 1999, the commander notified the applicant that she was being discharged for a condition that interfered with military service, specifically for mental disorders. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the records document entry level separation for unsuiting maladjustment to military training. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01180
On 2 Apr 02, the applicant's request for remission of his indebtedness of $2903.50 was considered and denied by the Director, Air Force Review Boards Agency (AFRBA) (Exhibit B). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/DPPCC noted that as a result of non-availability, the applicant's orders were amended to read "Members auth full per diem, for off base lodging and commercial meals to maintain team integrity. To remedy the error, the...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Before she entered the Air Force in 1995, she was told by recruiters in the Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) recruiting office in Washington DC that there was a 4-year active duty service commitment with a 2- year inactive Reserve commitment upon discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPA concedes it is regretful that the applicant...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states that without any documentation showing the applicant was deployed to the Persian Gulf in direct support of an operation, they can not verify her eligibility for the Southwest Asia Service Medal. After reviewing the evidence of record we are not persuaded the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence showing the applicant’s service meets the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00693 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be upgraded. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and...
On 30 Aug 70, the applicant was relieved from his assignment in the Air Force Reserve and honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve in the grade of E-1. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied. Since the applicant was not on active duty at the time the Air Force Overseas (Long/Short) Tour Ribbon was established, he is not eligible for this award.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01499 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation be changed on her DD Form 214. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice warranting a change to the narrative reason for separation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03272
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 7 January 2005, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. After reviewing the evidence of record, we agree with the findings and recommendation of the Joint Personal Property Shipping Office and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision that the...